Transgender teens challenge Kansas law banning gender-affirming care for minors
Kansas's Senate Bill 63 prohibits health care providers from administering treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgeries to minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria, characterized by a severe psychological distress that stems from a mismatch between a person's gender identity and sex at birth.
The bill, passed by the state Legislature in January, includes exceptions for minors born with 'a medically verifiable disorder of sex development.' Health care providers who break the law, which also targets social transition, face civil penalties and may be stripped of their license.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Kansas filed Wednesday's challenge in Douglas County District Court pseudonymously on behalf of plaintiffs Lily Loe, 13, Ryan Roe, 16, and their mothers, Lisa Loe and Rebecca Roe.
The two children 'have been thriving since they started receiving puberty blockers and hormone therapy,' the lawsuit states, 'but now their trusted doctors in Kansas can no longer help them, and they are at risk of unimaginable suffering.'
For their parents, Senate Bill 63 'impermissibly infringes on the fundamental right to the care, custody, and control of their children,' the lawsuit says, 'by displacing their medical decision-making authority with a government mandate, even when they, their adolescent children, and medical providers are all aligned.'
Republican state Attorney General Kris Kobach, who is named in the lawsuit, did not immediately return a request for comment.
Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill in February for the third time in as many years, though her veto ultimately did not stand.
'It is disappointing that the Legislature continues to push for government interference in Kansans' private medical decisions instead of focusing on issues that improve all Kansans' lives,' Kelly said in a statement at the time. 'Infringing on parental rights is not appropriate, nor is it a Kansas value. As I've said before, it is not the job of politicians to stand between a parent and a child who needs medical care of any kind.'
The state's Republican-led Legislature overrode Kelly's veto the following week. Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson (R) and House Speaker Dan Hawkins (R) said they voted to override the governor's action 'in honor of the children Governor Kelly failed to protect with her repeated vetoes of this sensible legislation.'
The ACLU and the ACLU of Kansas are seeking an injunction to block enforcement of the law while the case moves forward.
'Our clients and every Kansan should have the freedom to make their own private medical decisions and consult with their doctors without the intrusion of Kansas politicians,' said D.C. Hiegert, civil liberties legal fellow for the ACLU of Kansas.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
6 minutes ago
Father of 3 Marines who was forcibly detained by immigration agents at landscaping job speaks out
An undocumented father of three Marines who was forcibly detained by federal immigration agents while at his landscaping job in California last month spoke out for the first time on Friday in emotional, tearful remarks. Customs and Border Patrol agents arrested Narciso Barranco in Santa Ana on June 21, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Video of him being forcibly detained showed masked agents holding him down on the street and repeatedly punching him after he ran from agents. He is currently out on bond after being released from federal custody on July 15 and has an immigration status hearing in August, according to Orange City Council officials. During a press conference in Santa Ana surrounded by local officials and leaders, Barranco thanked the community and his family for their support. "I love you all and I am very proud of you," he said to his children in Spanish. To his wife, Marta, he said, "Thank you for your strength, love, and for never stopping believing in me." Barranco also spoke to the families of other detainees he met while in custody. "I want to tell their families they have faith, they miss you all, and even in that place, they have hope," he said. Barranco asked of federal authorities, "Please, don't take away the opportunities for them to reunite with their families." Lisa Ramirez, a founding partner of US Immigration Law Group and Barranco's legal representative, said his story is not an isolated case. "What I think we can all learn from this one story is that there are hundreds and soon to be millions of people like Mr. Barranco who have been long-standing contributors to our country, who will also be arbitrarily arrested and detained," she said. The Department of Homeland Security said following the arrest that Narciso Barranco is in the country illegally and that he tried to evade law enforcement, "swung a weed whacker directly at an agent's face" and resisted commands. "The agents took appropriate action and followed their training to use the minimum amount of force necessary to resolve the situation in a manner that prioritizes the safety of the public and our officers," DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement at the time. One of Barranco's sons, Marine veteran Alejandro Barranco, told Congress members this week that his father got scared after the masked agents approached him while he was at work. "As he worked, he noticed masked men approaching him, and was quickly surrounded by men who did not identify themselves and never presented any type of warrant," he told Democratic members of the House Committee on Homeland Security during an oversight forum examining the Trump administration's detention and deportation practices on Tuesday. "Terrified, he ran. They chased him through the parking lot and into a crowded street. They pointed guns at him, pepper-sprayed him. They tackled him to the ground and kicked him." He said his father, who has two other sons who are currently serving as Marines, has no criminal record and "should have never been attacked by these agents." "He supported his family and paid taxes," the veteran said. "He is a human being, but he was not treated with the basic dignity he deserved."
USA Today
35 minutes ago
- USA Today
Judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit over sanctuary laws in Chicago and Illinois
WASHINGTON - A federal judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Justice Department that accused the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago of unlawfully interfering with President Donald Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins in Chicago was a setback for Trump's litigation campaign against local "sanctuary" laws that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. White House and Justice Department spokespersons did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Trump, a Republican seeking to deport millions of immigrants in the country illegally, has sparred with Chicago and other Democratic strongholds over their policies. Democrats, in turn, have criticized the Trump administration's aggressive enforcement tactics, including plainclothes immigration agents covering their faces to hide their identities and arrests of immigrants with no criminal records. Supporters of sanctuary laws have said local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement would discourage immigrants who are living in the country illegally from coming forward as victims or witnesses to crimes. The Chicago City Council passed an ordinance in 2012 that stops city agencies and employees from getting involved in civil immigration enforcement or helping federal authorities with such efforts. The Illinois legislature passed a similar state law, known as the TRUST Act, in 2017. The Justice Department sued Chicago and Illinois in February, alleging these laws violate the U.S. Constitution's "Supremacy Clause" that states that federal law preempts state and local laws that may conflict with it. Jenkins, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, rejected that argument in Friday's ruling, saying the city's and the state's policies are protected by the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which ensures that states retain significant powers not explicitly granted to the federal government. The Trump administration on Thursday filed a similar lawsuit against New York City over its local sanctuary laws. A similar case against Los Angeles is pending.
Los Angeles Times
35 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump voters wanted relief from Medical bills. For millions, the bills are about to get bigger
President Trump rode to reelection last fall on voter concerns about prices. But as his administration pares back federal rules and programs designed to protect patients from the high cost of health care, Trump risks pushing more Americans into debt, further straining family budgets already stressed by medical bills. Millions of people are expected to lose health insurance in the coming years as a result of the tax cut legislation Trump signed this month, leaving them with fewer protections from large bills if they get sick or suffer an accident. At the same time, significant increases in health plan premiums on state insurance marketplaces next year will likely push more Americans to either drop coverage or switch to higher-deductible plans that will require them to pay more out-of-pocket before their insurance kicks in. Smaller changes to federal rules are poised to bump up patients' bills, as well. New federal guidelines for COVID -19 vaccines, for example, will allow health insurers to stop covering the shots for millions, so if patients want the protection, some may have to pay out-of-pocket. The new tax cut legislation will also raise the cost of certain doctor visits, requiring copays of up to $35 for some Medicaid enrollees. And for those who do end up in debt, there will be fewer protections. This month, the Trump administration secured permission from a federal court to roll back regulations that would have removed medical debt from consumer credit reports. That puts Americans who cannot pay their medical bills at risk of lower credit scores, hindering their ability to get a loan or forcing them to pay higher interest rates. 'For tens of millions of Americans, balancing the budget is like walking a tightrope,' said Chi Chi Wu, a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. 'The Trump administration is just throwing them off.' White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not respond to questions about how the administration's health care policies will affect Americans' medical bills. The president and his Republican congressional allies have brushed off the health care cuts, including hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid retrenchment in the mammoth tax law. 'You won't even notice it,' Trump said at the White House after the bill signing July 4. 'Just waste, fraud, and abuse.' But consumer and patient advocates around the country warn that the erosion of federal health care protections since Trump took office in January threatens to significantly undermine Americans' financial security. 'These changes will hit our communities hard,' said Arika Sánchez, who oversees health care policy at the nonprofit New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty. Sánchez predicted many more people the center works with will end up with medical debt. 'When families get stuck with medical debt, it hurts their credit scores, makes it harder to get a car, a home, or even a job,' she said. 'Medical debt wrecks people's lives.' For Americans with serious illnesses such as cancer, weakened federal protections from medical debt pose yet one more risk, said Elizabeth Darnall, senior director of federal advocacy at the American Cancer Society's Cancer Action Network. 'People will not seek out the treatment they need,' she said. Trump promised a rosier future while campaigning last year, pledging to 'make America affordable again' and 'expand access to new Affordable Healthcare.' Polls suggest voters were looking for relief. About 6 in 10 adults — Democrats and Republicans — say they are worried about being able to afford health care, according to one recent survey, outpacing concerns about the cost of food or housing. And medical debt remains a widespread problem: As many as 100 million adults in the U.S. are burdened by some kind of health care debt. Despite this, key tools that have helped prevent even more Americans from sinking into debt are now on the chopping block. Medicaid and other government health insurance programs, in particular, have proved to be a powerful economic backstop for low-income patients and their families, said Kyle Caswell, an economist at the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C. Caswell and other researchers found, for example, that Medicaid expansion made possible by the 2010 Affordable Care Act led to measurable declines in medical debt and improvements in consumers' credit scores in states that implemented the expansion. 'We've seen that these programs have a meaningful impact on people's financial well-being,' Caswell said. Trump's tax law — which will slash more than $1 trillion in federal health spending over the next decade, mostly through Medicaid cuts — is expected to leave 10 million more people without health coverage by 2034, according to the latest estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The tax cuts, which primarily benefit wealthy Americans, will add $3.4 trillion to U.S. deficits over a decade, the office calculated. The number of uninsured could spike further if Trump and his congressional allies don't renew additional federal subsidies for low- and moderate-income Americans who buy health coverage on state insurance marketplaces. This aid — enacted under former President Joe Biden — lowers insurance premiums and reduces medical bills enrollees face when they go to the doctor or the hospital. But unless congressional Republicans act, those subsidies will expire later this year, leaving many with bigger bills. Federal debt regulations developed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the Biden administration would have protected these people and others if they couldn't pay their medical bills. The agency issued rules in January that would have removed medical debts from consumer credit reports. That would have helped an estimated 15 million people. But the Trump administration chose not to defend the new regulations when they were challenged in court by debt collectors and the credit bureaus, who argued the federal agency had exceeded its authority in issuing the rules. A federal judge in Texas appointed by Trump ruled that the regulation should be scrapped. Levey writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.
